/lit/ - Literature

>>14472270
Jordan Peterson's lecture series

>>14472280
He had a good point: people remember Freud or his mistakes, not for his successes, because those have become so commonly known and accepted.

>>14472270
>where do I go after I'm finished with him
Jung

>>14472270
Freud makes a whole lot unfalsifiable claims which makes many of his theories unusable in any meaningful way. “Do you usually have sexual thoughts about your father? No? You must be in denial then,” etc.

>>14472270
He mistook affection with lust. Boys want their mother's affection, not bloody fuck them. Only an autist could've reached that conclusion.

He was an INFP so while smart he was just chasing empty ideals just because INFPs crave meaning

>>14472298
>confusing conscious desires with unconscious desires

Go back and actually read him.

>>14472309
He was BTFO'd numerous times already. I know I'm right.

>>14472291
hmm

>Persisting Myths Surrounding Sigmund Freud's Dream Theory: A Reply to Hobson's Critique of the Scientific Status of Psychoanalysis (Colace and Boag, 2015)


>Psychoanalysis, science and the seductive theory of Karl Popper (Grant and Harari, 2009)

>Why Aren’t More Philosophers Interested in Freud? Re-Evaluating Philosophical Arguments against Psychoanalysis (Michael, 2019)

"Popper’s charge about the unfalsifiability of key Freudian claims is anyhow highly questionable. He himself focused on Freud’s claim that all dreams are wish-fulfillments, arguing that one can always find grounds for maintaining such a claim but one cannot specify what evidence would falsify it. This is incorrect, as I have argued at greater length elsewhere (Michael 2015). There are numerous logically possible observation statements that would falsify Freud’s wish-fulfillment claim (at least, if one accepts certain background theories, as Popper’s theory requires). For example, if it were found that the limbic system and associated neural structures essentially involved in motivation were (even relatively) inactive in the dreaming brain, that would falsify Freud’s wish-fulfillment claim in the sense required by Popper’s theory. Similarly, if it were found that no or few young children (ages 2–4) had straightforwardly wish-fulfilling dreams, that would falsify Freud’s claim in Popper’s sense."

>>14472270
He universalised his own neuroses into a cosmic melodrama. So while most of his claims about human nature were simply the projections of his own warped psyche, it has to be said that he was the first thinker to fully engage the self in conversation (or even negotiation) with its own desire, attempting to confront the extent of our secret depravity. Without him we'd likely still be struggling with a lot of dangerous repressions and inhibitions, simply because we would lack the vocabulary to articulate them.

>>14472270
Every knowledge should be read with skepticism, applied to real life, statistical analysis of experimentation and results established and then the hypothesis should be concluded.
His arguments about human nature are true and predicting.
Ignore low iq poster here.

Why this dude have such boring dreams

>>14472270
not 100% hack but his fanbase is actually retarded

>>14472935
Freud has a fanbase?

>>14472935
Just go to any literature campus.

>>14472291
>Freud makes a whole lot unfalsifiable claims which makes many of his theories unusable in any meaningful way.
They're usable in therapy. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IQBx5TONHac
Even granting the unfalsifiability charge for the sake of the argument, you failed to explain how mere unfalsifiability is supposed to make them unusable.
>“Do you usually have sexual thoughts about your father? No? You must be in denial then,” etc.
That's not how it works.

>>14473059
Not going to watch your cult propraganda film

>>14473135
Here's the summary just for your lazy faggot ass.

>>14473272
Depresion isnt real

>>14472270
>"The case of Freud himself, founder of 'psychoanalysis', is quite typical in
this respect, for he never ceased to declare himself a materialist. One further
remark: why is it that the principal representatives of the new tendencies, like Einstein in physics, Bergson in philosophy, Freud in psychology, and many others of less importance, are almost all of Jewish origin, unless it he because there is something involved that is closely hound up with the 'malefic' and dissolving aspect of nomadism when it is deviated, and because that aspect must inevitably predominate in Jews detached from their tradition?"

>>14473318
Grammar is.

>>14472280
>>14472285
based.
it's not like subconsciousness and it's conflicting compartments aren't real just because he somewhat arbitrarily categorized them. second force that is clearly prevalent in modern world is "penis envy", even if it probably has totally different causes

>>14472270
A classic example of a strongly self-identified Jew acting in his ethnic interests, taking himself to be an enemy of the goyim

Brilliant thinker. His books were easily the most influential stuff I have read.

>>14472291
>Freud's stufff is unfalsifiable thus unusable
>“Do you usually have sexual thoughts about your father? No? You must be in denial then.”

Jung's better